Insider Dealing Prosecutions

Lord Phillips of Sudbury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many prosecutions for insider dealing have been brought by the Special (sic) Fraud Office or any other government agency in the past five calendar years; and how many have resulted in conviction.

Lord Goldsmith: The Serious Fraud Office has commenced one prosecution against four defendants for an offence of conspiracy to commit an offence under Section 52 Criminal Justice Act 1993, namely insider dealing.
	The defendants were charged in December last year with this offence. The case has been sent to the Crown Court but a date has yet to be fixed for trial.
	In addition, the CPS does not hold central records about this type of offence and the information could only be obtained at disproportionate cost. However, the CPS Casework Directorate has indicated that it is handling one current case involving five defendants charged with a variety of offences connected with the insider dealing provisions. The case is in its early stages at the Crown Court.

Immigration: Medical Examinations

Lord Ackner: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether asylum seekers and those seeking to emigrate to the United Kingdom are subject to compulsory medical examinations; and, if not, why not.

Lord Filkin: Under the Immigration Act 1971, immigration officers are able to refer persons seeking leave to enter the United Kingdom, including those seeking asylum, to medical inspectors at ports of entry. Paragraph 36 of the Immigration Rules (HC 395) sets out the circumstances in which immigration officers may refer an individual to a medical inspector for examination.
	Current policy is to refer for medical examination any persons who mention health or medical treatment as a reason for their visit, or who appear not to be in good mental or physical health, or who intend to remain in the United Kingdom for more than six months and come from an area of the world which is high risk for tuberculosis. In addition, the Immigration Rules state that those seeking leave to enter the United Kingdom for more than six months should normally be referred.
	People applying abroad for entry clearance to the United Kingdom are not subject to mandatory medical inspections, but the entry clearance officer has the same discretion as an immigration officer to refer applicants for entry clearance for medical examination.
	In addition, asylum seekers attending the induction centre at Dover are given basic health screening, which includes full medical history and tuberculosis screening and referral (as appropriate). We will extend this process as we develop a network of induction centres. However, there are currently no powers to require all asylum seekers to undergo health screening.
	In response to public concerns about the incidence of infectious diseases such as HIV/AIDS, TB and hepatitis B and C among immigrants, the Government are currently undertaking a comprehensive review of imported infections and immigration.

Work Permits: IT Sector

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What consideration they are giving to the possibility of imposing greater restriction on the grant of work permits in the information technology sector, in light of estimates that more than 50,000 information technology professionals are currently out of work in the United Kingdom.

Lord Filkin: There are published criteria governing the issue of work permits, which are applied to all work permit applications irrespective of the sector in question. These criteria are designed to safeguard the interests of the resident labour force while meeting the need of employers to recruit workers with the skills that they need. All applications are checked to ensure that the requirements of the work permit arrangements are met and Work Permits (UK) may also conduct post-issue checks to establish that the work permit arrangements are complied with. The criteria of the work permit arrangements are kept under regular review by Work Permits (UK).
	However, Work Permits (UK) does seek to ensure that operation of the work permit arrangements, and, in particular, the list of those occupations which should not be subject to a resident labour search requirement, reflects labour market conditions in specific sectors. Work Permits (UK) works closely with IT Industry bodies, trade unions and other government departments, which are represented on its Information Technology Communications and Electronics Sector Panel, to review the availability of suitably qualified IT workers in the resident labour market. On the advice of this panel, IT occupations were removed from Work Permit (UK)'s shortage occupation list in September 2002.

G8 Summit: Government's Objectives

Lord Judd: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	With particular reference to NePAD (the New Partnership for Africa's Development), what their specific objectives are at the G8 Summit with reference to each of the following (a) the battle against AIDS; (b) the elimination of polio; and (c) the rights and welfare of children.

Baroness Amos: The G8 Summit took place between 1 and 3 June in Evian. One area of discussion was progress on the G8 Africa Action Plan, which sets out G8 countries' support for NePAD.
	In global terms, the fight against AIDS was taken forward in two ways: on undertaking by the G8 to resolve the outstanding issues in the negotiations on intellectual property rights and public health before the World Trade Organisation Ministerial Conference in September and increased funding for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria (the UK announced a further 80 million dollars for 2006–08), along with a call to improve its effectiveness.
	Similarly, at a global level, the G8 renewed their commitment to eradicating polio.
	The issues of the rights and welfare of children were not specifically discussed at Evian.

DfID: Secondments

Lord Fearn: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many Department for International Development staff have been deployed in Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan and Iran to monitor and access humanitarian needs and to liaise with United Nations agencies.

Baroness Amos: DfID currently has six advisers working with the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) in Baghdad on humanitarian assistance and liaison between CPA and Iraqi administrators, the United Nations and other humanitarian agencies in Iraq. In Basra, five DfID staff are liaising with humanitarian agencies and the UK military, two secondees are working for UN agencies, and three humanitarian advisers are seconded to the UK military. Five DfID secondees are working for UN agencies in Amman, Jordan. DfID does not currently have any staff in Kuwait or Iran.

Armed Forces: Medical Reservists

Lord Vivian: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they agree with press reports that morale among the Armed Forces reservists medical personnel is low; and, if so, what action is in hand to prevent resignations within this group.

Lord Bach: We are very grateful for the contribution our medical reservists have made in the support of military action against Iraq. Senior officers in the Defence Medical Services have met medical personnel returning from the Gulf region to thank them personally for their contribution and, if necessary, explain decisions that have been taken that affect them and listen to any concerns they may have had. Personnel returning from the Gulf have indicated that morale is generally high. Reports from theatre indicate that as future plans have now been clarified, and individuals know their part in them and when they are due to return to the United Kingdom, those remaining on deployment are now generally content.

33 Field Hospital

Lord Vivian: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why 33 Field Hospital in Iraq was replaced by reservist medical personnel two days prior to the onset of hostilities; why it was sent to a transit camp; and what duties 33 Field Hospital carried out during the Iraq conflict.

Lord Bach: 33 Field Hospital was intended to be the first United Kingdom field hospital to deploy to the Gulf, as at the time it was the field hospital held at the highest level of preparedness. Its equipment, however, was prevented from leaving port by Greenpeace protestors. A 25-bed element of 22 Field Hospital, a regular unit, was flown to theatre as a stopgap to offset the delayed arrival of 33 Field Hospital. Once in theatre, 33 Field Hospital deployed and prepared an operational field hospital within the UK concentration area in northern Kuwait. As the UK force built in size, additional medical units were required; 34 Field Hospital, a regular unit but with significant reservist augmentation, followed by 202 Field Hospital (Volunteers), a Territorial Army unit. The latter subsequently took over from 33 Field Hospital in situ. This enabled 33 Field Hospital to act as a flexible reserve, a task for which it was better suited than the other field hospitals.

Water Supplies for Civilians in Times of War

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will seek to forbid the destruction or pollution of the supply of drinking water for civilian populations in periods of war or international armed conflict, as part of international humanitarian law.

Lord Bach: Deliberate targeting of drinking water installations and supplies is already forbidden in international law under Article 54 of the First Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949. The employment of poison and poisoned weapons is further prohibited by article 23 of the Hague Regulations of 1907. International law does, however, recognise that lawful attacks directed at military objectives may have unwanted consequences for civilians and/or civilian objects. It is not possible to guarantee that lawful military attacks will not under any circumstances result in damage to water supplies for civilian populations.

Depleted Uranium: H & S Advice to Service Personnel

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What health and safety guidance they have issued to servicemen when in the vicinity of Iraq tanks that have been destroyed by ordnance containing depleted uranium.

Lord Bach: I refer the noble Baroness to the answer my right honourable friend the Minister for the Armed Forces (Adam Ingram) gave to the honourable Member for Blaenau Gwent (Llew Smith) in another place on 11 April 2003 (Official Report, Commons, col. 421W).
	Safety instructions covering all aspects of the hazard management of DU munitions in theatre were issued through the operational chain of command by the Permanent Joint Headquarters (PJHQ). These can be found on the Ministry of Defence Internet site at http://www.mod.uk/issues/depleted uranium/gulf safety instructions.htm.

Depleted Uranium: H & S Advice to Service Personnel

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the guidance issued to servicemen when in the vicinity of Iraq tanks that have been destroyed by ordnance containing depleted uranium varies from that given to United States servicemen; and, if so, how.

Lord Bach: Safety guidance for our personnel reflects the specific requirements of United Kingdom government policy and statutory obligations contained within UK and EU regulations. Informal discussions between UK and US officials suggest that broadly similar arrangements exist for ensuring the safety of those who might encounter depleted uranium munitions debris.

Iraq: Post-conflict Deployment of UK Armed Forces

Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to adjust UK force levels in Iraq.

Lord Bach: In the Written Statements by my right honourable friend the Defence Secretary of 11 April (Official Report, Commons, 38–39WS) and 30 April (Official Report, Commons, 15–16WS) in another place he described UK force level adjustments to reflect the evolving strategic situation in Iraq, including the call-out of up to 1,200 reservists. In the subsequent Written Statement of 22 May (Official Report, Commons, 44–45WS) in another place, he announced the call-out of a further 1,500 reservists to support continuing operations within Iraq. We continue to assess the requirements for a continued UK presence in Iraq in support of the Iraqi people. This process is dependent on a number of factors, including progress made against our military campaign objectives, and multinational contributions to stabilisation operations.
	Positive discussions continue with a number of nations regarding military deployments to Iraq. We have so far received commitments from seven countries for contingents comprising a total of around 5,500 personnel to contribute in the UK area of operations. A Danish Marine battalion has already arrived, and is making a valuable contribution to Coalition operations in Al Qurnah.
	Overall 25,000 UK servicemen and women have returned from operations in the Gulf—more than half those originally deployed. Some 17,000 UK servicemen and women currently remain in the region. We will maintain a balanced and flexible force to suit the operational situation in Iraq. To this end, we are now in a position to announce a number of further adjustments to our forces in the region.
	Since the Statement of 30 April in another place, we have continued where possible to scale back our military presence within Iraq and the surrounding region. The maritime presence in the Gulf now comprises two frigates, currently HMS "Richmond" and HMS "Chatham", and a nuclear-powered submarine, supported by the Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessels "Brambleleaf" and "Diligence". On current plans, we envisage maintaining a maritime presence at this level for the foreseeable future.
	For land forces, the planned withdrawal of 3 Commando Brigade Royal Marines and of other land personnel which he announced on 30 April in another place is now complete. In addition to the movements set out in that statement, 16 Air Assault Brigade has now been withdrawn including 3 Parachute Regiment and 3 Army Air Corps. We have also withdrawn the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards, 1st Battalion The Light Infantry, the Queen's Royal Lancers and 1st The Queen's Dragoon Guards.
	These adjustments will be followed by the replacement of HQ 1 (UK) Armoured Division with HQ 3 (UK) Armoured Division, which we anticipate will complete by mid-July. As we have previously announced, we envisage that 19 Mechanised Brigade will deploy within the same timescale, and preparations are under way to prepare for and to facilitate this movement. HQ 102 Logistic Brigade completed its hand-over to HQ 101 Logistic Brigade in early May as planned, and the brigades' sub-units are currently engaged in a phased rotation. When fully assembled, these units will represent a total of around 10,000 servicemen and women.
	Around 90 fixed-wing aircraft and some 80 helicopters have returned following the highly successful contribution of the Royal Air Force and the Joint Helicopter Command to the Coalition air campaign. The deployment of the 1st Air Control Centre to Tallil to contribute to an overall ground-based radar picture over Iraq has allowed for the withdrawal of our two deployed E3D aircraft. The Royal Air Force now has 8 Tornado GR4s remaining in theatre with a number of supporting aircraft. In addition, the Joint Helicopter Force retains a balanced rotary-wing presence, 18 helicopters comprising Chinook, Sea King, Lynx and Gazelle helicopters.
	Since the Statement of 30 April in another place, around 850 additional reservists have been accepted into service, and the call-out process continues. Our reservist men and women continue to play a vital role in supporting stabilisation operations in Iraq, in accordance with the aims of the Strategic Defence Review that the reserve forces should be more integrated, relevant and useable. In parallel to the call-out process, we have so far demobilised over 1,700 reservists who have returned from Iraq as a part of the wider programme of withdrawals.
	We pay tribute to all of the men and women who have contributed so successfully and professionally to the military campaign in Iraq. We continue to assess the situation as military operations contribute to the gradual return of stability to the country, and to respond in an appropriate manner; our presence will continue to be dictated by the requirements of Iraq and the Iraqi people. The House will be kept informed of any further significant developments.

Congo

Lord Dixon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the Government's response to the security situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Lord Bach: The House will be aware of the humanitarian crisis in the Ituri province in the Democratic Republic of Congo, particularly in and around the town of Bunia in the north-east of the country.
	The UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has requested an interim multinational force to stabilise the town of Bunia and to facilitate the arrival of UN reinforcements. This is likely to be an EU-led operation under European foreign and security policy auspices.
	The UK is discussing possible contributions with EU member states and other potential contributors. We are considering providing a small contingent of support elements together with aircraft to assist in the deployment of the force. The House will be informed once final decisions have been taken on the size and scale of UK contributions.

Health Records: Requests for Access

Lord Clement-Jones: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What powers of sanctions they will use against National Health Service trusts which do not comply with requests for access.

Baroness Andrews: Requests for access to health records are governed by the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA 98). Responsibility for compliance with the DPA 98 rests with individual National Health Service (NHS) trusts. Enforcement is undertaken by the Information Commissioner. The Department of Health supports the National Health Service in meeting data protection requirements via the provision of guidance and through performance management arrangements.

Non-residential Property: Stamp Duty

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will publish or place in the Library of the House the submissions they made to the European Commission in order to receive approval for the exemption of non-residential property transactions in disadvantaged areas of the United Kingdom from stamp duty until December 2006, and if not, why not.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: It is not usual to publish submissions to the European Commission in these cases. However, the documentation related to the state aid approval for the extension of this measure to all non-residential property transactions does not contain commercially sensitive information and negotiations have been concluded. I am therefore able to place a copy of the relevant submissions in the Library of the House.

Money Laundering

Lord Wakeham: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the answer by the Lord Davies of Oldham on 3 June (HL Deb, col. 1161), what steps they propose to take to encourage the Financial Services Authority to ensure that the financial institutions continue to pursue illegal money laundering but at the same time lessen the bureaucratic burdens that have been placed on their clients.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Financial institutions are required by the Money Laundering Regulations (which implement an EU directive) and rules by the Financial Services Authority to take reasonable steps to identify their customers The UK's anti-money laundering regime is designed to be flexible and proportionate to risk in order to minimise the burden on customers. Neither the regulations nor the rules prescribe detailed requirements as to how identification should be done. Detailed guidance is provided in the Guidance Notes issued by the industry's Joint Money Laundering Steering Group. Both the Treasury and the FSA encourage the industry not to take an unduly bureaucratic approach to the identification requirements.

Biomass Energy

Lord Palmer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What estimate has been made of biomass production in the United Kingdom in 2010, the net reduction in greenhouse gas production arising from biomass production on a year-by-year basis between now and December 2010, and the total cost (including writing off research) per tonne of the carbon saved.

Lord Whitty: It is estimated that biomass production in the UK in 2010 could reach around 3.5 million oven-dried tonnes. Of this total, around 2 million tonnes will be used for the production of heat, with the remaining 1.5 million tonnes for the production of electricity.
	The reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and the total cost per tonne of carbon saved depend on the type of biomass, the technology used, and the fossil fuel displaced. A general guideline is that one tonne of biomass used for heat or electricity will result in a net saving of one tonne of carbon dioxide. Higher savings are achieved where coal is the displaced fuel or where combined heat and power technology is used. The cost of reduced greenhouse gas emissions from biomass energy is estimated to be about between £128 and £256 per tonne of carbon (£35–£70 per tonne carbon dioxide). Research costs are excluded from this calculation as the Government's biomass research programme underpins long-term development and it is unrealistic to write-off the cost by a set date.

Council Tax and Rent Debt: Enforcement

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have plans to change current arrangements for the enforcement of debts against poverty level incomes and the penalties that can be imposed or threatened for rent and council tax arrears.

Lord Rooker: There are no plans to change the current arrangements for the enforcement of council tax and rent debt.
	Local authorities have a range of enforcement options which include the rescheduling of payments, attachment of earnings orders, taking a charge on the property or levying distress. For those debtors who have the means to pay but do not, local authorities can seek committal to prison.
	The method of enforcement used is at the discretion of each local authority but we would expect them to act sensibly and sensitively with persons who are in financial difficulties. However, local authorities do have a duty to collect council tax and rent. If they do not act diligently it will have serious consequences to their revenue flows which could lead to higher council tax bills and rents, a reduction in services or both. This would not be fair on those who pay their bills regularly and on time.
	For those people on low income help is available through the means-tested council and housing benefit systems. These can meet up to the full cost of their bills.

Light Pollution

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What representations they have received from the Council for the Protection of Rural England and the British Astronomical Association about light pollution; and whether they will consult these bodies as well as local authorities, lighting manufacturers and the Institute of Lighting Engineers about measures needed to reduce the problem.

Lord Rooker: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has received a number of representations from the Council for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE) about its joint campaign with the British Astronomical Association against light pollution—"Night Blight". Officials from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister have met representatives from CPRE to discuss the campaign and its proposals.
	In October 2002 the Government issued a consultation paper entitled Living Places—Powers, Rights, Responsibilities. One of the issues the paper addresses is dealing with nuisance lighting, which it notes is a general contributor to light pollution. The paper sought opinions as to whether the Government should introduce new regulations for positioning of external lighting (other than street lights) and the powers to extend the statutory nuisance regime to include lighting. The Council for the Protection of Rural England and the British Astronomical Association (Campaign for Dark Skies) both responded to the consultation. These responses, along with the others received, are being considered carefully before any of the options set out in the consultation are taken further.
	The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister would, of course, undertake a full consultation, including all the bodies listed, if it was proposed to introduce any additional measures to mitigate light pollution.

Planning Inspectorate Executive Agency: Performance Targets

Lord Peston: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What performance targets they have set the Planning Inspectorate Executive Agency for 2003–04.

Lord Rooker: I am pleased to announce today the targets I have set this year for the Planning Inspectorate Executive Agency.
	We are reforming the planning system to make it faster, fairer and more efficient. I need to ensure that the Planning Inspectorate is well placed to respond robustly to the increasing demands for its services and to the changes we are introducing. We have set in hand a business process "end to end" review 1 of the Planning Inspectorate which will be completed by the autumn and there are implications for the Inspectorate in the provisions of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill which is currently before Parliament.
	Against this background I have decided to maintain most of the existing targets in place for this year. These are set out below. The exceptions are the targets for the completion of inspectors' reports on called-in planning applications and recovered appeals and that for appeals going to hearings.
	In line with the office's PSA6 target, by March 2004, 80 per cent of planning inspectors' reports to the Secretary of State on called-in and recovered appeal cases must be delivered within seven weeks of the close of the inquiry.
	The only other change involves the timeliness target for planning appeals going to hearings which, in order to deal with a backlog of cases, is now the same as for planning appeals going to inquiry.
	These targets are not just about speed: they are about reaching the right decision and providing the community with a quality service. The Planning Inspectorate is responding well to the challenge this presents.
	Timeliness
	(a) Planning Appeals
	80 per cent of all planning appeals decided by written representations to be determined within 16 weeks;
	80 per cent of all planning appeals decided by hearings to be determined within 30 weeks;
	80 per cent of all planning appeals decided by inquiries to be determined within 30 weeks.
	(b) Enforcement Appeals
	80 per cent of all enforcement appeals decided by written representation to be determined within 32 weeks;
	80 per cent of all enforcement appeals decided by hearings to be determined within 33 weeks;
	80 per cent of all enforcement appeals to be decided by inquiries to be determined within 43 weeks.
	(c) Called In and Recovered Appeals
	By March 2004, 80 per cent of inspectors' reports to the Secretary of State on called-in and recovered appeal cases to be delivered within seven weeks of the close of the inquiry.
	(d) Development Plan inquiries
	To provide an inspector for development plan inquiries in 90 per cent of cases on the date requested by the local authority, provided that the objection period has ended and at least six months' notice has been given.
	To deliver 90 per cent of inspectors' reports on development plan inquiries to local authorities according to timescales agreed under service agreements.
	Quality
	To satisfy the Advisory Panel on Standards for the Planning Inspectorate, and thus the Secretary of State and the first Minister of the National Assembly for Wales, annually and following rigorous monitoring, that the quality of all the inspectorate's work is being maintained at a high standard, with 99 per cent of its casework free from justified complaint.
	Information and Guidance
	To undertake a time series customer satisfaction survey of the inspectorate's performance and to act upon the results.
	1 This review, whose conclusions will feed into the 2004 spending review round, was announced in Parliament by Mr Tony McNulty, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, on 4 February, 2003: Hansard Column 9WS.

Royal Prerogative: Ministers of the Crown

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will publish a list of the public functions performed by Ministers of the Crown acting under the Royal prerogative rather than under statute.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Government do not maintain a list of the public functions performed by Ministers otherwise than under statute. Given the range of government activity it would not be practicable to compile such a list; nor do the Government maintain a list based on any narrower definition of the prerogative. Such definitions are a matter of generalisation from the analysis of particular legal decisions.
	The following are examples of public functions which are performed by Ministers, or by the Sovereign on the advice of Ministers, and which would generally be considered within a narrower definition of the prerogative: appointment and regulation of the Civil Service; commissioning of officers in the Armed Forces; exercise of the prerogative of mercy; issue and revocation of UK passports; granting of honours; making of treaties; declaration of war and peace; deployment of the Armed Forces; recognition of foreign states, and accreditation and reception of diplomats.

Suez Veterans: General Service Medal

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether a decision has been reached on the award of a medal to those who served in the Suez Canal Zone between 1951 and 1954.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Following a recommendation from the sub-committee chaired by Lord Guthrie of Craigiebank, we are pleased to announce that Suez veterans who served in the Canal Zone between 1951 and 1954 are to be awarded the General Service Medal.
	In examining this case so long after the events, the Committee on the Grant of Honours, Decorations and Medals recognised that it had special features. Although it had been established that the Commander in Chief at the time made a request for a medal there was no conclusive evidence that the case was ever fully considered and a formal decision reached. Nor had the deployment been recognised by the award of any other campaign medal.
	The detailed qualification criteria for the medal will be submitted to HM the Queen for approval in due course. Copies of the sub-committee's report are being placed in the Libraries of both Houses of Parliament.

Northern Ireland: Equality Agenda

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the equality agenda in Northern Ireland; who drafted it; who agreed it; and where may it be located.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The equality agenda in Northern Ireland flows from the Belfast agreement, which was negotiated and agreed by the majority of political parties in Northern Ireland and endorsed in referendums on both sides of the border.

Northern Ireland: Equality Officers

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many officials, of what rank and at what cost, are employed in each department in Northern Ireland and in the Northern Ireland Office, promoting equality.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: It is difficult to identify precisely the number of officials within the Northern Ireland Office and the Northern Ireland administration who have responsibility for promoting equality as it is a fundamental part of every civil servant's role to promote equality.
	Within the Northern Ireland Office 10 officials are employed either wholly or mainly in the development and maintaining of equality policy. These include two Grade As, four Grade B1s, two Grade B2s and two Grade Cs and their total salary cost is approximately £281,654.00. In addition, a considerable number of other staff support operational divisions in the promotion of equality as part of their wider responsibilities. It is not possible to apportion a percentage of salary costs to attribute to this activity.
	The 11 departments of the Northern Ireland administration have identified 110 officials who are employed either wholly or mainly in this role. They include four senior civil servants and 106 other grades. The salary cost of these officials is approximately £3.44 million.

Northern Ireland Departments: Underspend

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answers by the Lord Privy Seal on 11 March (WA 168) and 30 April (WA 102), why in the cases of the Departments of Agriculture and Rural Development, Culture, Arts and Leisure and Social Development and the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister was more underspend carried from 2001–02 into 2002–03 than was underspent in 2001–02.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The underspend figures included in WA 168 reflected actual expenditure for 2001–02, as determined by final outturn information for that year, collated in February 2003. However, the amount carried forward from 2001–02 into 2002-03, as detailed in WA 102, was (in accordance with Treasury's end year flexibility (EYF) scheme) based on an estimate of departmental spend in 2001–02 as determined by provisional outturn information in early summer 2002. Departmental expenditure figures can increase or decrease between provisional outturn and final outturn stages, and any such changes are taken into account in determining the final EYF claim.
	As highlighted in WA 102 the remainder of the amount available for carry forward, based on actual departmental spend, will be drawn down in 2003–04, subject (as is always the case in respect of EYF) to agreement by the Treasury.

North/South Implementation Bodies

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which proportions of the funding between Her Majesty's Government and the Government of the Irish Republic for the Cross-Border Implementation Service have been altered over the past four years; how and why; who took these decisions; and on what basis.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The proportionality of funding between the UK Government and the Irish Government for each of the North/South Implementation Bodies is determined on the basis of assessed benefit to each jurisdiction from their activities. The relevant contribution rates were initially determined at the time the bodies were established, and have been subject to annual review thereafter. The proportionality has been altered for two out of the six bodies over the past four years as a result of the ongoing review process, with all changes being subject to ministerial agreement in accordance with established procedures. Details are set out in the table below.
	
		Changes to Proportionality Funding of North/South Implementation Bodies from 2000 to 2003
		
			 North/South Implementation Body Year % Split (North:South) 
			 Foyle, Carlingford & Irish Lights  Commission (FCILC) 2000 2001 2002 2003 30:70 30:70 50:50 50:50 
			 Special EU Programmes Body  (SEUPB) 2000 2001 2002 2003 20:80 55:45 50:50 55:45

North/South Implementation Bodies

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How long North/South Implementation Bodies can continue to exist under the Belfast agreement without the existence of a Northern Ireland Assembly.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The bodies continue to exist in the expectation of the resumption of devolution in Northern Ireland and the restoration of the Assembly.

North/South Implementation Bodies

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is meant by the expression "not to introduce any new policies" in the area of Cross-Border Implementation Bodies in the statement of clarification by the two governments in response to certain concerns regarding the agreement of 19 November 2002.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: As indicated in the statement of clarification by the two governments in response to certain concerns regarding the agreement of 19 November 2002, the British and Irish Governments intended only to pursue the policies and actions already agreed in the North/South Ministerial Council.

North/South Implementation Bodies

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	On what date were the recommendations for the 2003–05 budgets for all the implementation bodies approved by the North/South Ministerial Council under the exchange of notes arrangement (Cm 5708).

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Ministers approved the recommendations for the 2003–05 budgets under the exchange of notes arrangements on the dates shown in the table below.
	
		
			 Implementation Body Date of Approval 
			 Waterways Ireland 24 February 2003 
			 Trade & Business Development Body 25 February 2003 
			 Language Body 26 February 2003 
			 Food Safety Promotion Body 27 February 2003 
			 Special EU Programmes Body 6 March 2003 
			 FCILC 11 March 2003

Waterways Ireland

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 29 April (WA 90), what are the detailed costs of Waterways Ireland for 2001 and 2002; and how much was spent in Northern Ireland.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Details are as follows:
	
		
			  2001 N Ireland 2002 N Ireland 
			 Entertainment £174 Nil £1,268 £872 
			 Public Relations £24,441 *N/A £33,929 *N/A 
			 Total £24,615  £35,197 
		
	
	*Information on public relations spent in Nothern Ireland is not available as the waterways are generally promoted as a single entity network rather than on the basis of individual waterways.

North/South Language Body

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the legal status of the financial memorandum entitled The North/South Language Body—Financial Memorandum which was supplied to that body on its creation.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The financial memorandum to which the noble Lord refers is the financial memorandum drawn up by the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure and the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, and the two finance departments, North and South. In Northern Ireland, the North/South Language Body is required to comply with the financial memorandum by virtue of (i) the agreement of 8 March 1999 made between the British Government and the Irish Government establishing the North/South Implementation Bodies and (ii) the North/South Co-operation (Implementation Bodies) (NI) Order 1999.

North/South Language Body

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 12 May (WA 1), in what form and on what date the Ulster Scots Agency was informed by the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs of the change in the provision for the North/South Language Body.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Answer given on 12 May 2003 (WA 1) indicated that on 12 November 2002 the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (DCRGA) advised the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL) of DCRGA's 2003 provision for the North/South Language Body and similarly advised the body a few days later. In practice, by agreement between the two departments, that advice was given to the two agencies of the body via telephone calls from DCAL to the Ulster Scots Agency and from DCRGA to the Irish Language Agency. These calls were made on 14 November.
	On 17 January 2003, and with the agreement of DCAL, officials in DCRGA advised the two agencies by email of the total indicative provision for each agency for 2003.

North/South Language Body

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 12 May (WA 1-2) concerning the budget of the language Implementation Body, whether Unionist political advisers were consulted about the decision to cut the budget by 16 per cent.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The special advisers in the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister were consulted on the budgets for the bodies prior to the British and Irish Governments approving the recommendations for those Budgets under the exchange of notes between the two governments of 19 November 2002.

Northern Ireland: Special Advisers

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the role of political advisers attached to the Northern Ireland First Minister and Deputy First Minister's Office.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Special advisers are employed in the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister to assist the former First Minister and Deputy First Minister during suspension, working for a smooth return to devolved government and engaging in discussion for that purpose.

Belfast Airports: Rail Links

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to develop further the railway connections to Belfast International Airport and Belfast City Airport.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: In view of the high costs involved and the low level of passenger demand, Northern Ireland Railways have no plans to develop further railway connections to either Belfast International or Belfast City Airports.

Northern Ireland: Disused Rail Tracks

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in Northern Ireland, existing former railway track beds will be preserved for future transport use.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Development plans will identify disused rail track beds, which provide a realistic opportunity for reuse for transportation purposes, or for recreation, leisure or tourism related use. Protection of these routes is a "material consideration" in the determination of planning applications and appeals.

Northern Ireland: Buses

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to encourage and support private sector involvement in bus transportation in Northern Ireland.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Financial support is already available to private operators of scheduled bus services in Northern Ireland in the form of a rebate on fuel excise duty and concessionary fares grants.
	In a consultation document issued in September 2003, entitled A New Start for Public Transport in Northern Ireland, the department set out proposals which included the progressive opening up of the public transport market to private sector participation. The next stage in this process has included the department commissioning review of the regulation of bus services with the aim of developing a new regulatory framework within which a publicly owned public transport company would continue to have a lead role in the provision of bus services but within a market that may be opened up progressively to private sector involvement. The study is to be completed in November 2003 and will be subject to further consideration thereafter.

Northern Ireland: Translink Services

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the current average age of Translink's bus fleet in Northern Ireland.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Translink has advised that as at 31 March 2003 the average age of its bus fleet was 13.4 years. It is the Department for Regional Development's policy that Translink should replace buses as they reach their target replacement age of 18 years. Increasing maintenance costs and reliability problems make keeping vehicles over this age in operation uneconomical and unsatisfactory. The allocation of an additional £40 million for bus grants in the Northern Ireland budget, announced in December 2002 will, subject to economic and other appraisal processes, enable Translink to replace older vehicles and reduce its average fleet age.

Northern Ireland: Translink Services

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they are taking to reduce uneconomic competition between Translink's bus service and its rail service.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Translink has, since its inception, endeavoured to provide integrated public transport services where feasible, with the aim of both improving options for the travelling public and also managing bus and rail services in an operationally efficient and economic way. Under this regime, the emphasis is placed on bus and rail services being complementary to one another. We have no plans to ask Translink to alter this operating regime.

Northern Ireland: Speeding Convictions

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many people have been convicted of speeding in Northern Ireland in each of the past five years.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The table sets out the number of speeding convictions from 1996 to 2000. Statistics in respect of 2001 and 2002 are expected to become available towards the end of the year. Figures are for "excess speed", an offence under Article 43 of the Road Traffic Regulations (Northern Ireland) Order 1997.
	
		
			   
			   
			 Year Number of Convictions 
			 1996 2,350 
			 1997 2,948 
			 1998 2,973 
			 1999 3,728 
			 2000 3,715

Portadown and Armagh Rail Link

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to establish a railway link between Portadown and Armagh.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Due to the substantial costs that would be incurred in establishing a railway link between Portadown and Armagh and the expected limited usage of such a link, this project was not included in the regional transportation strategy for Northern Ireland 2002–12, the strategic direction and underlying principles of which were agreed by the Northern Ireland Assembly on 3 July 2002. Accordingly there are no plans to establish a railway link between Portadown and Armagh.

Northern Ireland: Park and Ride Facilities

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to introduce park and ride facilities alongside Northern Ireland Railways locations at Trooperslane, Templepatrick, Corrs Corner, Scarva, Knockmore and Tillysburn.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The provision of park and ride facilities is one of the initiatives included in the Regional Transportation Strategy for Northern Ireland 2002–12, the strategic direction and underlying principles of which were agreed by the Northern Ireland Assembly in July 2002.
	As area plans are developed opportunities for park and ride facilities will be protected. The Belfast Metropolitan Transport Plan is currently being developed and will likely include proposed park and ride facilities for Trooperslane, Knockmore/Lisburn West and Tillysburn.
	Park and ride facilities at or close to Templepatrick will likely be included in the Antrim, Ballymena and Larne Area Plan.
	All proposed park and ride facilities will be subject to economic and financial appraisal, and relevant statutory processes.
	There are no plans to provide park and ride facilities at Corrs Corner, however, they have been constructed at nearby Mossley West.
	There are no plans to provide park and ride facilities at Scarva Station.

North/South Ministerial Council

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How the policy of transparency is applied to the decisions of the North/South Ministerial Council set up under the Belfast agreement of 1998.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The same policy of transparency applies as under devolution.
	A list of decisions taken up to 28 March 2003 under the exchange of notes between the British and Irish Governments on 19 November 2002 was placed in the Library on 7 April 2003 and I hope to publish shortly details of further decisions taken since then.

Fintona Development Association

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any public money has been paid to Fintona Development Association in County Tyrone since 1997; if so, from what body; and how much.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Since 1997, Fintona Development Association has received funding of £2,400—from the Department for Social Development, through its Voluntary and Community Unit, under the Community Volunteering Scheme Small Grants Programme.
	In addition, since 1997 the association received Peace I funding through the following funding bodies: £18,685 Northern Ireland Voluntary Trust; £20,000 Omagh District Partnership.
	Information about funding provided by departmental agencies or NDPBs has not been included in this Answer.

Tourism Ireland

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When was the budget for 2002 for Tourism Ireland approved by the North/South Ministerial Council under the exchange of notes process (Cm 5708).

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Ministers approved the budget for 2002 for Tourism Ireland Limited on 6 December 2002.

Tourism Ireland

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When was a replacement director of Tourism Ireland appointed under the exchange of notes process (Cm 5708); who was appointed; after what process; how many applications were received; and where, on which salary scale, is the successful applicant currently.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Mr Tom McGrath was appointed to the board of Tourism Ireland on 28 January 2003.
	NSMC had agreed in October 2000 that the chairmen of both Bord Failte Eireann and the Northern Ireland Tourist Board would be appointed as board members of Tourism Ireland Limited. On that basis, Mr McGrath, who became chairman of the Northern Ireland Tourist Board on 1 January 2003, was proposed for appointment as a director of Tourism Ireland Limited.
	The current remuneration for directors of Tourism Ireland Limited is 6,348.69/£4,000 per annum. There is no salary scale.

Northern Ireland: Planning Appealsand Approvals

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What percentage of Article 33 appeals under the Planning (Northern Ireland) Order 1991 have been successful each year to date; and
	What is the averge percentage of approvals upheld by the Planning Approvals Commission in Northern Ireland during the periods 1990–94 and 1995–2000.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Planning Appeals Commission is a tribunal non-departmental public body and the chief commissioner has been asked to write to the noble Lord directly. I will ensure that a copy of his letter is placed in the Library.

Northern Ireland: Environment and Heritage Service Budget

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the Northern Ireland Environment and Heritage Service's budget for each of the past five years; and what was the level of expenditure each year.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Environment and Heritage Service's budget and expenditure, for the past five financial years commencing 1998–99 to 2002–03, are as follows:
	
		
			  Budget £k Expenditure £k 
			 1998–99 21,748 21,827 
			 1999–2000 23,827 23,601 
			 2000–01 27,426 27,145 
			 2001–02 32,659 31,730 
			 2002–03 41,593 38,214 
		
	
	Budgets and expenditure from 1998–99 to 2000–01 have been prepared on a cash basis as extracted from published Appropriation Accounts.
	From 2001–02 all budgets are reported on a full accruals basis as required under the Resource Accounting and Budgeting regime.
	Expenditure for 2002–03 is provisional and is subject to audit by the Northern Ireland Audit Office.

Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 21 May (WA 83) concerning smoking in the Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast, whether they consider that spending on facilities for smokers is a proper use of money allocated to health services.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Government require all health and personal social services bodies to operate no-smoking policies. Current guidance reflects the need for such bodies to adopt a pragmatic approach in formulating policies to deal sensitively with issues such as smoking in long-stay facilities. Other factors to be taken into account include the potential risk to patients and others from smoking in inappropriate areas.
	The Government remain committed to promoting a smoke-free environment in all health and social services facilities. A five-year tobacco action plan for Northern Ireland, which will be published shortly, will provide a framework for achieving this objective.